Saturday, October 27, 2012

Saint Paul was a person well experienced
with life. He tells us about his many experiences including many sufferings.

“But
whatever anyone else dares to boast of—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to
boast of that. Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are
they offspring of Abraham? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? I am a better
one—I am talking like a madman—with far greater labors, far more imprisonments,
with countless beatings, and often near death. Five times I received at the
hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with
rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked; a night and a day I was
adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from
robbers, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city,
danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers; in toil
and hardship, through many a sleepless night, in hunger and thirst, often
without food, in cold and exposure. And, apart from other things, there is the
daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches. Who is weak, and I am
not weak? Who is made to fall, and I am not indignant? If I must boast, I will
boast of the things that show my weakness. The God and Father of the Lord
Jesus, he who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying. At Damascus, the governor under King Aretas was guarding the
city of Damascus
in order to seize me, but I was let down in a basket through a window in the
wall and escaped his hands.” (II Corinthians 11:21-33 ESV)

He
also speaks often of his many joys in Christ (Romans 15:32; II Corinthians 2:3;
Philippians 2:2; I Timothy 2:20).

When
we read Paul’s experiences, we can see that he lived a human life much like
that which you and I experience today: a life of suffering and a life where one
experiences great joy.

A
part of Paul’s (and ours) experiences in life lead him to express his own
shortcomings and human frailties when coming to the question of the daily task
of reconstructing his own character. Paul (like you and especially I) had major
challenges with this issue and this is exactly what he tells us.

“What
then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for
the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to
covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.” But in, seizing an
opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness.
For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but
when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment that
promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through
the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and
the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

Did
that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing
death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin,
and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. For we know
that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not
understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing
I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good.
So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know
that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to
do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good
I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I
do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. So I
find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For
I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another
law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of
sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from
this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I
myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of
sin.” (Romans 7:7-24 ESV)

Paul
saw inside of himself a delight in God’s law, but in his own experience, he
found himself deficient (as are you and I) when it came to performance. His
reference to his own shortcomings was not an isolated incident. He referred
many times to his own personal nature, which he characterized as sinful,
mortal, corruptible, and fleshly, terms any honest, self reflecting person is
very familiar with. Note what he told Timothy:

“I
thank him who has given me strength, Christ Jesus our Lord, because he judged
me faithful, appointing me to his service, though formerly I was a blasphemer,
persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy because I had acted
ignorantly in unbelief, and the grace of our Lord overflowed for me with the
faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. The saying is trustworthy and
deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save
sinners, of whom I am the foremost.” (I Timothy 1:12-15 ESV)

It
is interesting that Paul did not say that he “was” previously the “foremost”
sinner. No! He uses the present tense to describe his earthly condition. Let us
be honest though, Paul was doing his best to pursue his Christian walk, but
found that “I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry
it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I
keep on doing.” (ibid.)

But
when did Paul write these statements? How old was he when he was making these
statements? Many authorities agree that Paul was born in the first decade of
the First Century and died before 70AD. Let us consider a general chronological
outline of some general events of the New Testament period which can help us
see when this might have happened.

Sabbatical Year in the
First Century among the Jewish People 34
to 35 AD

Sabbatical Year in the
First Century among the Jewish People 41
to 42 AD

Galatians composed (17
years (1:18; 2:1) leads back to AD 31 48
AD

Paul travels to Jerusalem to take part in Jerusalem Council 49 AD

Sabbatical Year in the
First Century among the Jewish People 48
to 49 AD

Jerusalem Council meeting
(Acts 15) 49
AD

Paul arrives in Corinth (Second
Journey) 50/51
AD

Paul spends 18 months in Corinth (Acts 18:11) 51/52 AD

Paul before Gallion (Acts
18:12-17) 52
AD

Paul visits Jerusalem (Acts
18:21,22) 52
AD

Paul starts Third Journey
(Acts 18:23) 53
AD (Spring)

Paul reaches Ephesus late Spring 53
AD

Paul stays in Ephesus for two
years (Acts 19:10) 54/55
AD

Paul wrote I Corinthians
(at Passover time) 55
AD

Paul asks Corinthians to
save money for poor Jerusalemites to be given them for the upcoming
Sabbatical Year kept in Jerusalem
(I Cor. 16:15) 55 AD

Paul goes to Macedonia 55
AD (late in year)

Paul writes II Corinthians
late in the year in Macedonia 55 AD

Sabbatical Year in the
First Century among the Jewish People 55
to 56 AD

Sabbatical Year begins in
the Fall of the Year (II Cor. 8:10; 9:2) 55
AD

Paul returns to Corinth (Acts 20:3) 55
AD (late Fall)

Paul writes Romans (Romans
15:25-33) 56
AD (Spring)

Paul in Jerusalem at Pentecost (Acts 20:16) 56 AD

Sabbatical Year ends 56
AD (Autumn)

Paul imprisoned in
Ceasarea for two years 58
AD

Sabbatical Year in the
First Century among the Jewish People 62
to 63 AD

Jerusalem Destroyed by the Romans 70
AD

This chronological reconstruction above comes from the work of my late father "The Year of Christ's Crucifixion." - (Foundation for Biblical Research, April 1983)

Now,
we have to speculate a little bit about the person of Paul himself to help us
understand the personal context in which he writes Romans 7. He is not here
writing as a young person with little or no experience in life. On the
contrary.

When
we first encounter Paul in Acts, we find him mentioned at the death of Stephen
described as a “young man” (Acts 7:58). However, while he may have been considered
a young man, he was one who had reached a fairly high position in the religious
hierarchy in Jerusalem.
Let us remember that Paul, then called Saul, had received permission and a
mandate directly from the high priest of the whole nation of Israel, who was
the top religious authority in the world at that time concerning matters of the
Jewish faith, to go to Damascus to seek Christians and bring them back to
Jerusalem for punishment (Acts 9:1,2) Apparently Paul was considered qualified
to undertake such a mission by the high priest at that time.

This
shows that Paul in his youth, as he even himself says, had reached a very high
level of responsibility within the religious hierarchy in Jerusalem at that time. Notice what he said
in public which demonstrates this point quite clearly.

“Brothers
and fathers, hear the defense that I now make before you.” And when they heard
that he was addressing them in the Hebrew language, they became even more
quiet. And he said: “I am a Judaean, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up
in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner
of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God as all of you are this day. I
persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering to prison both men and
women, as the high priest and the whole council of elders can bear me witness.
From them I received letters to the brothers, and I journeyed toward Damascus to take those also who were there and bring them
in bonds to Jerusalem
to be punished.” (Acts 22:1-5 ESV)

It must be understood that someone in the position
of Paul (then called Saul) was one who was considered to be one of the most
loyal, competent, highly achieving academic religious experts at the time who
was given the task to defend Judaism from the new schism of Christianity.

Such a job would not have been given to a
maverick. This would only have been entrusted to one whose reputation and
loyalty to the faith was unquestioned.

Paul at that time would have fit in exactly to the
Pharisaical model of life and culture. Chronologically speaking, we have some
very early testimonies which point to a general outline of what this life might
have looked like. Here is a great quote from Rabbi Rosenfeld.

"He [Yehuda ben Taima] used to say: At five
[one should begin the study of] Scriptures; at ten, Mishna; at thirteen [one
becomes obligated in] the commandments; at fifteen [the study of] Talmud; at
eighteen the wedding canopy; at twenty to pursue; at thirty strength; at forty
understanding; at fifty counsel; at sixty old age; at seventy fullness of
years; at eighty spiritual strength; at ninety bending over; at one hundred it
is as if he has died and passed on from the world."

In this Mishnah, Yehuda ben Taima sums up the human
experience with simple but uncanny accuracy. It is interesting that although
Yehuda earlier challenged us to such great heights -- to serve G-d with the
fierceness of a leopard, swiftness of a deer, etc. (Mishnah 23)
-- here he sees life in such undulating order and regularity. We reach for the
stars, yet we must be thankful if we merit lives of normality and longevity.

Before we begin examining the stages of life, I
can't resist quoting a parallel statement in the Midrash (Koheles Rabbah 1:2)
-- more amusing, in a pathetic sort of way. In the beginning of Koheles
(Ecclesiastes), King Solomon seven times calls the physical world a place of
"hevel" -- vanity or futility. The Midrash relates this to the seven
stages of life. At one year of age, man is a king, fondled and doted upon by
all. At two and three he is a pig, groping in the garbage. At ten he prances
around like a kid. At twenty he is a horse, preening himself in search of a
wife. After marriage he works like a donkey to earn a living. When he has
children he is brazen as a dog trying to raise and support his family. And at
the end of his life he becomes senile and senseless as an ape. A script few of
us veer from. For better or worse -- as Yehuda wrote above -- life really is a
mimicry of the animal kingdom!” (Here making reference to the ancient Hebrew
book – Pirke Avot - http://www.torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos/chapter5-25.html#)

When we consider the descriptions of Paul and the
level of responsibility he had achieved, it is really hard for us to imagine
that he was less than age 30 at the time he received letters from the High
Priest to go to Damascus.

Let us again remind ourselves of Paul’s statement
again in Acts 22, where he said he was “brought
up in this city (Jerusalem),
educated at the feet of Gamaliel, according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers.”
(Acts 22:2)

Now,
considering this fact that Paul was adhering not to the liberal manner, but to
the “strict manner of the law” does this give us any clue as to Paul’s age when
he received the letters from the High Priest? Perhaps.

As a
strict Pharisee, Saul would have been a zealous keeper of the commandments of
God and this included all 613 of them. However, there is one commandment, which
in fact is the very first commandment of all which if a person in that period
was not adhering to would have positioned that person well outside of the
normative mainstream of Judaism.

This
commandment is found in Genesis 1:28 and it says ;”Be fruitful and multiply,
and fill the earth, and subdue it.” Judaism has long recognized this as the
first of all commandments which is a requirement of all adherents to the Jewish
faith.

For
men, this means two things. It means marriage and it means becoming a father.
Note how Rabbi Chill helps us understand this issue. He quotes numerous ancient
authorities which would precisely represent what was the norm in Paul’s time.

“When
a man reaches the age of 18 he becomes subject to the mitzvah to marry and to
have children. … To fulfill this mitzvah adequately, a man must beget at least
one son and one daughter who, in turn, must be physically capable of begetting
children of their own. In other words, one had not fulfilled the mitzvah of
procreation if, for example, he begets a son who is sexually impotent or a
daughter who is barren.” (Chill, The Mitzvot: The Commandments and their Rationale,
pg. 3)

When
we encounter Paul in Acts 9, it is almost unthinkable that he would not be
looked on as one of high responsibility, a dignitary holding official letters
in an entourage of people, he being the representative of the High Priest
himself! Such a job is not one for a man of 20 years! It is hard to imagine
Paul being less than 30 years old at this time.

It is
hardly to be expected also that a man of Paul’s stature within Judaean society
at that time would have been unmarried. When we consider such a person who came
from a family that were born Roman citizens, (Acts 22:28) having enough
financial means to be able to send their son to Jerusalem to study at the feet
of one of the most respected Rabbis of the time (Acts 5 & 22), to have reached
the stature in the cultural system of the day where he was selected by the High
Priest directly to have been entrusted with sacred duties to defend the faith
at that time, one cannot imagine that such a person living within the
environment of Judaism, on a track to himself become one of the leading
scholars in the city, this makes Paul, in fact, one of the most eligible men
living in Jerusalem at that time!

Paul,
in fact, had reached the pinnacle of achievement within Judaism at that time.
He was a “Pharisee of the Pharisees.” He was someone whose academic achievement
was the highest. Think about it. If you were the High Priest of the country,
would you not select the best candidate to do a specific job? Would you not
select the most able person to represent you and your wishes in your absence?
If you were the top religious leader of the country, would not your selection
of a specific individual for a specific task give some indication of your level
of confidence in that person and their right to be designated for such a
position due to their obvious achievement?

There
are many speculations concerning evidence in the Ecclesiastical History written
by Eusebius in the early 300s, which says Paul was married. Paul himself says
that: “I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Judaeans of my own age and was
extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers" (Galatians
1:14). To think that this meant a negation of non-adherence to the very
first commandment found in the Judaean faith is really almost impossible.

In
fact, based upon Paul’s own account of his growing up in Jerusalem and studying
at the feet of the great rabbi Gamaliel, it is quite possible that Paul could
have even encountered Jesus Himself at age 12 when Jesus was Himself for three
days in the presence of the great teachers of the Law. (Luke 2:46) Paul himself
may have even known of Jesus, this child prodigy from the Galilee!
It could very well be as they were both in Jerusalem perhaps at the same time.

So if
Paul was at least age 30 in Acts 9, this would make him in AD 56 when Romans
was written himself being at least 55 years old. This is the circumstance in
which Paul found himself, a mature grown experienced man writing what he did in
Romans 7.

“For
I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out”

So,
this is the circumstance that Paul (and you and I) found himself (and
ourselves) in. He (and we) want to do what is right, but we do not possess the
ability to do it perfectly. It is a part of our human condition to make
mistakes, to be mortal, corruptible and sinful.

We are
not alone in our experience of this sinful state known as the human condition.
It is something which all humans experience and that experience extends to all
ages of life. The nature to be sinful is something inherited by all of the
children of Adam. (Romans 3:23)

While
we all recognize this, there are one group of people, who while they have
inherited this sin nature, they have yet to realize it in the same way that
Paul, certainly being above 50 years of age at the time, recognized it. They
are sinners just like Paul was, but they themselves do not yet know it! Yet,
today many continue to engage this group who live among us, with approaches and
actions which seek to attempt to stamp out or eliminate this sinful nature even
while the sinner himself doesn’t even realize that he or she himself is sinful.

Here,
of course, we are talking about young children and in this case, we are talking
about young children under the age of five in particular. Children under five
are our subject here because there is a well known level of cognition that all
of us who are parents know exists which is not present before that age.

I read
a psychological book which described a simple formula that one could use to
help us understand that the minds that these young children have are still
developing and do not have any where near the same level of understanding that
children over five (generally speaking) possess. A simple question can be posed
to the under five year old to illustrate this. I have two children and one of
them is under age five (in 2011). If I ask her “Do you have a sister?” She will
say “yes.” But if I take her mind beyond this to a more difficult and complex
question saying “Does your sister have a sister?” She will have to really think
that one through and only by about age five according to scientists do children
begin to say. “Yes, my sister has a sister and I am her.”

We can
in fact see this idea being expressed by Paul in Scripture. It is found in I
Corinthians 2:11. “For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that
person, which is in him?”

This
is a most important scripture. There is a “spirit” in man. There is a spiritual
side to man. But, this spiritual side takes time to develop! As quoted earlier,
man takes time to develop and grow up: “At two and three he is a pig, groping in the
garbage.” (ibid.) A two or three year old does not have an inner spiritual man
operating in the same way as an older child! Not at all!

It shows
that man himself cannot know even the things of the flesh unless through the
spirit which is in man. This condition exists when a child is born and
continues well into the time about up to age three or four. (depending on the
individual)

By age
five, children have some general awareness about life on a day to day basis,
but prior to that time, they are certainly human, but the “spirit of that
person, which is in him” has not yet developed and become aware of what it
really means to be human.

Now,
if we go back to the example that Paul gives us of his own experience as a
grown, highly educated, experienced, seasoned man knowing all aspects of life
found in his own life an inability to do what is right by his own admission.
Let us rehearse what he said: “For I have the desire to do what is right, but
not the ability to carry it out.” (Romans 7:18)

So,
now we have to ask ourselves a question. Why is it that today many well
intentioned Christian advocates of child rearing are so focused on punishing
little children for sin (often starting before these little children of God are
still babes in arms) before the time when these children even have an awareness
of what human life is all about? They do not have ant experience with life,
have no concept of what sin is and they do not yet even know the difference
between right and wrong much less have a desire to do what is right, yet they
are introduced to complex ideas about sin and punishment well before the time
when their minds are even working at a level to comprehend even the most basic
aspects of life.

The
fact is, “the spirit of that person, which is in him” is not yet “in” little
children under about age five, yet the preferred Christian approach today by
many is to treat that little child, not as a totally innocent being, who not
only does not “have the desire to do what is right”, but also does not even
know what “the desire to do what is right” is, as a guilty sinner in the same
category as that which aware humans who themselves (like Paul) “do not
understand my own actions.” (Romans 7:15) No, little Tommy or Suzy has to
understand that they are wrong, evil sinners who deserve to be punished
starting preferably while they are still babes in arms while us grown ups
acknowledge that we have the “desire to do what is right, but not the ability
to carry it out” and we ourselves “do not understand my [our] own actions.”

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Note: The main inspiration for this post comes from an article titled: The
important role of women in the Old Testament (FBR:1984) written in 1984 by my later
father, Prof. Ernest L. Martin. My father was teaching egalitarianism since
before I was born in the mid 1960’s.

Of late, I have been blessed to
develop many contacts with women writers, bloggers, mothers and women scholars
and I’ve personally become very interested in gender equality. I’ve put some
posts on this blog talking about some of my ideas and I really feel lead to
continue pursuing this area.

I am working on a major study on
gender equality which may take many years to finish, but it has already reached
40,000 words so it is becoming a really large book.

I am also working on a really
specific post dealing with a redemptive movement hermeneutic building on a
specific teaching that my father taught me which he termed “The Doctrine of
Accommodation.” This features the idea that God wishes us to “accommodate”
Scripture to our modern changing, world. It seeks to show how we can interpret
Scripture in a way that allows to address issues not specifically covered in
Scripture, but to know we are doing so using the Spirit of God. This keeps our
trajectory focused towards redemption as Prof. William Webb would term it. My
father saw the movement towards redemption throughout Scripture reaching back
even into the book of Genesis. In fact, for those who have eyes to see and ears
to hear, one can find in fact quite a Gospel of grace even just in the book of
Genesis alone! More on that later.

Hope to get that out fairly soon as
I think philosophically it presents the idea of egalitarianism in a more
comprehensive Scriptural way using an approach which I have so far not yet seen
presented elsewhere. The approach to interpreting Scripture that my father used
was very simple, but very comprehensive. It addresses all of the outstanding questions
and hard texts in a very elegant but very simple, convincing way which I think
is very hard to argue with. Praying to get that out very soon.

The major role of women in the formation of the Hebrew Bible

In the last few years, I have noted
a great interest among women (mainly mothers) concerning my writings, in
particular my book (now a free ebook – - get it here- http://whynottrainachild.com/2013/06/22/download-martins-book/)
dealing with what the Bible teaches about corporal punishment
(spanking/smacking). This was the first major book that I wrote and I have been
so blessed by the feedback that I have received mostly from hundreds of women.

After publishing my first book, I
began to look for other areas of interest where I felt I could make a
contribution and to learn some things myself. I connected with so many writers
and bloggers, almost all of them women. I could name a score or more who have
influenced me profoundly and want to thank all of those who have blessed me deeply.

Many of these connections have come
about through my own book (dealing with corporal punishment and the Bible), but
I’ve tried to engage a little bit in the whole egalitarianism/ complementarianism
debate.

But, now I want to take this
discussion to a new level. This is because it is time for the true role that
God has had, now has and will have in the future for women to be told.

Unfortunately, if we were to
continue listening to some of the mostly male voices out there, we would learn nothing
new. Some people just seem to be trapped in the nonsense that women have a
secondary role in God’s Kingdom. This is because according to some, the Gospel
has a “masculine feel” to it.[1] With
views like this, many women feel “complementary”; they feel like second class
citizens in the kingdom of God. Nothing could, however, be farther from the
truth.

Let us be clear. The views expressed
by many men holding complementarian views have a number of results associated
with them. One is that women are subject to men and basically are left to do as
they are told and to be welcome in church just as long as they come in, sit
down and shut up! This is basically how it is for so many women. I know about
this because I grew up in a church where this is how it was. The men were in
charge. Period! I believe that many women feel inferior, unimportant,
secondary, lesser, and a whole host of other adjectives and these well
intentioned (but, in my view, misguided) Biblical literalists are not ready to lift one finger to change an
iota or give way on any point that moves to a Biblical position of equality.

These male dominated structures are
quite happy to keep the status quo as it is now with them in their positions of
authority and women in the place where the believe God has placed them, in a complementary
position.

Well, in this paper, we’re going to
look at things just a bit different. In fact, we’re not even going to be
focusing on the New Testament concerning this issue. No! We are going to focus
squarely on the Biblical revelation given through the Hebrew Bible (the
Christian Old Testament).

To begin, let me put the tone of
this paper right out front by saying the following:

“Many people make the assumption
that women were in a very inferior position in Old Testament times. Nothing
could be farther from the truth. The fact is, women were ordained by God to play
the most important role in the establishment of, and the sustaining of, a
proper godly society within human civilization. Women are the key factor in the
whole issue and their role should be restored in modern society.” (Martin, The
Important Role of Women in the Old Testament: FBR: 1984)

This
is something well known in Judaism. Women are the cornerstone of a healthy
society. Note the following:

“A
wife meant a home; hence the saying, ‘a man’s home is his wife’ (Yoma 1.1), and
Rabbi Jose said, ‘Never have I called my wife by that word (e.g. – He never
spoke of his wife as “his wife”), but always ‘my home.’ (Shab.118b).” (ibid.)

This
is a lovely and deserved tribute to the wife of Rabbi Jose. It is a bit poetic
and Middle Eastern culture is prone to such speech. Even today, I am always
happy to hear my brother in law talking to his wife calling her “Ruhi,” (my spirit), or “Elbi, (my heart) or “Umri,” (my life). These types of terms are used
quite commonly used even today and we can see from the Rabbi’s statement, he
chose to call his wife “Beti” (my home).
To him, having a wife was synonymous with having a home. The two were
inseparable.

Emphasis
on a proper family life in the Old Testament

is
unmistakeable and wholly overlooked today

Now, let’s look at how we can see a
very foundationally oriented emphasis on the importance of women and their role
in God’s economy and in family life is demonstrated so clearly in the Old Testament.
This issue has not been understood by many, but Scripture clearly shows that
godly women and their influence on proper Biblical society was one of the main
guiding factors that contributed even to the formation of the Hebrew Bible that
we have in our midst today known among Christians as the Old Testament.

The Old Testament that we have today
was compiled and placed into the hands of the recognized Hebrew authorities by
Ezra the Priest. Ezra was known as the “Second Moses” due to the power and
influence he had and the final Bible we have today in the Hebrew canonical
scriptures has its origin with Ezra. Ezra compiled and put the books together
and since he completed this, we now have the Hebrew Bible in our midst.

A fundamental point about the Hebrew Bible

Now, it must be understood as a
fundamental idea that the Hebrew Bible, which are the Holy Scriptures to those
who adhere to Judaism, are the same books which are found in most English
Bibles today. For example, the books of the Old Testament are the exact same
books as those found in the Hebrew Bible.

However, there are some important
differences between the Hebrew Bible and most English Bibles. The main
difference concerns the order of the books. This may seem a minor point on the
surface, but unless one appreciates the importance of this point, this study on
the role of women in the formation of the Hebrew Bible may not be appreciated
in the way that it should be.

Now, before we get into this order,
let me reiterate. We not in any way, shape or form talking about different
books. No! Not at all! We are talking only about a reorganization of the books
to reflect a more Hebraic orientation found in the Hebrew Bible as we have it
today.

Let us also be clear that it is this
Hebraic orientation which focuses on Jerusalem, Israel, the Bible lands and
Bible culture is what we are reaching out to learn more about. One will not be
able to learn this information if you just stick with the good old King James
Version. There is nothing wrong with the King James Version, but that Bible
reflects a world view wholly focused on England in the early part of the 17th
century. For us to reach back into a first century perspective, we are going to
have look at the Hebrew Bible for inspiration.

The Hebrew Bible,

the order of the books

and how women influenced the formation of the Bible

I think most of us are fairly familiar
with the general order of the books of most English Bibles. What is less clear
though is the order of the books preserved in Hebrew Bible versions. Please
refer to the following blog post I did to help understand this issue more
clearly.

Now that we can see that there are
some differences, let us now consider the role women played in the selection of
these books and how the order in the Hebrew Bible reflects a decided influence
of women in the formation of the Hebrew Bible.

What we are going to find is that
family life in the Old Testament is considered very important and women have a
primary role in contributing to a godly family and a godly society.

“There is a remarkable emphasis in
the Old Testament about having a proper family life that is almost totally
overlooked by people who study the Bible today. In fact, it can be shown that
this emphasis was one of the main reasons for the formation of the Old
Testament itself. When Ezra the priest decided to select certain hooks to make
up the Old Testament for the Temple and synagogues, it was his stress on the
godly role of women in human society that prompted the placement of the books in
their official order. This especially applied to the eleven books of the Third
Division which Christ called “the Psalms" Division.” (Luke 24:44, 45)
(ibid, Martin)

To understand this role, we have to
look back at what was taking place when the Hebrew Bible was first formed under
the guidance of Ezra the priest in the 5th century BC.

“This role [of women] is selectively
revealed in the books of Ezra/Nehemiah, Malachi and the Book of Chronicles. So
many biblical teachers avoid any serious reference to the historical accounts
in these books that it is little wonder that this emphasis has not been
realized. But the biblical books have been arranged to teach the principal
elements which constitute a proper society for God's people, and the dominant
factor in attaining that stable society was women.” (ibid.)

There are every interesting and
clear teachings that one can glean from those books about the state of Hebraic
society in that period. It was in decline and facing serious challenges due to
a breakdown in family life taking place in the society at that time. Note the
following:

“When Ezra (and his aide Nehemiah)
saw the breakdown of family life starting to take place among the Judaeans at Jerusalem
then both of them stepped in to correct the problem before it corrupted the
whole of Judaean society. The main offenders were the princes and rulers among
the people, and it was especially bad among the ordained ministry (the priests,
including the family of the High Priest) (Ezra 9:1-2; 10:18). Read chapters
nine and ten of Ezra to see the extent of the problem which was confronting
Ezra. Those chapters show that many of the leading men of the nation bad
married foreign women and that children were being born as a result of these
marriages. There would have been little problem with intermarriages in
themselves had the women been converted to the observance of Old Testament laws,
(after all, even Moses was married to a Midianitess as well as a Cushite woman)
but this was not the case with these women. The children of these unions were
growing up in non-Judaean ways and in some cases they were not even able to
speak the Hebrew language (Neh. 13:23,24). Marrying foreign women was not necessarily
a bad thing (since Rahab in the genealogy of Christ was a Canaanitess and Ruth
a Moabitess), but it was a great evil if any woman was not converted to proper
Mosaic teaching. The truth is, children reared by foreign women (even if their fathers
were Judaean) would normally grow up to follow the beliefs and customs of their
mothers. It was this fact that alarmed Ezra and Nehemiah.” (ibid.)

It was obvious to Ezra and Nehemiah
that there was a serious issue facing the culture at that time and it had
serious ramifications on the future of the stability of that society. Action
was urgently needed to rectify this situation. The stakes were high!

“Had these intermarriages persisted
there would have remained no proper Judaic society within Jerusalem in two or
three generations. It was particularly upsetting because the principal peoples
involved in marriages with the foreigners were the princes, rulers and the
priests themselves. If the leaders were providing the example of intermarriage,
the common people would automatically follow in their footsteps. It was a
serious situation which had developed in Judaism about 450 years before Christ
and the Bible emphasizes it.’ (ibid.)

Not only were the leaders marrying
women who did not hold their religious or cultural beliefs, they had done so in
many cases while breaking up their own original nuclear families!

“Worse yet, not only were the
leaders marrying with non-converted women, they were divorcing their Judaean
wives (the wives of their youth) to take up with foreign women. The prophet
Malachi (which was a title probably for Ezra himself) rebuked both the priests
and secular leaders for this practice (Mal. 2:11-12). Indeed, the Judaean wives
who had been abandoned in preference to the foreign women were having to shed
tears at the altar of God for their destitute condition (Mal. 2:13-16) and Malachi
(that is, Ezra) characterized this abandonment as a treachery against the
Judaean wives. And so it was. The men had forsaken their wives causing the
proper Judaean wives not to fulfill their roles to bring up godly children. A
harmonious society was at stake!” (ibid.)

This situation was not acceptable to
Ezra and Nehemiah. Drastic action was needed to change course for the whole of
the society at that time. To change the direction, Ezra and Nehemiah demanded
some specific actions regarding the relationships that the men found themselves
in. These actions were very serious indeed.

“Both Ezra and Nehemiah demanded of
these Judaean leaders that they give up their foreign women they had
encountered and return to the wives of their youth (Mal. 2:14). These two men
of God actually forced the majority of Judaean men to enter a new covenant with
God to rectify their rebellious ways and to reinstitute a proper Judaean family
life with their proper Judaean wives (Ezra 9 and 10). And, for the most part,
their demands were heeded.” (ibid.)

While the majority of the men under
the religious guidance of Ezra did listen to him, not all of them did and look
at what happened because of this point.

“There were a few leaders, however,
who refused to accede to Ezra and Nehemiah. The grandson of the High Priest had
married a daughter of the king of the Samaritans. He refused to give her up (Neh.
13:27,28). This man went with his new wife to his father-in-law in Samaria and
became the High Priest of the Samaritans with a new Temple built near Shechem
about 35 miles north of Jerusalem. These Samaritans then began to claim that
they were the sons of Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) and were the true heirs to
the religion of Moses while they said that Ezra and Nehemiah were establishing
a 'false" Judaic religion with a "false" Temple at Jerusalem.
Thus, a major controversy arose between the Judaeans and the Samaritans over
who were the true representatives of the LORD (Hebrew: יהוה - the God of Moses and Israel). (ibid.)

This division caused the necessity
for major adjustments of a religious nature among the people of ancient Judaea.
One of these changes was the development of the Hebrew Bible at this time. The
Hebrew Bible was brought in at that time to address two major issues affecting
the community at that time:

“It was because of this Samaritan
controversy and to correct the improper society that was developing among the
Judaeans at the time that the Old Testament was brought into existence by Ezra.
He collected twenty-two books and assembled them into the divine canon.”
(ibid.)

Ezra, who as I mentioned before, was
known as the “second Moses” due to his importance in canonizing the Bible and
authorizing the books to be selected and included in the sacred volume. He had
a number of basic goals in mind in doing this.

“Ezra also wrote the Book of
Chronicles as a history (a specialized account) which proved that Jerusalem was
the true headquarters of God's divine government on earth, and that the House
of David at Jerusalem, the priesthood at Jerusalem, and the Temple at Jerusalem
had the approbation of God, not any so-called Temple, priesthood or leadership at
Samaria. And Christ told the Samaritan woman (John 4:22) that Ezra was correct
in his account. (ibid.)

Ezra also had other reasons for
including his books and for writing them in the way he did and one of these
concerns the importance of women in God’s economy. Martin continues:

“The main difficulty that Ezra had
with the Judaeans at Jerusalem was false religious beliefs and customs entering
Judaic society because of the intermarriages of Judaean men with heathen women.
It was a very upsetting situation as' Ezra viewed it because the intermarriages
involved the civil and religious leaders among the Judaeans. It was especially
bad because the priests (even the high priests) had been polluting their "holy
seed" (Ezra 9 & 10, Neh. 13:23-31; Mal. 1 & 2). This was a major deviation
from proper religious practice in the view of Ezra and he was so horrified at
it and the prospects of what it could lead to that he thought it prudent to
write the Book of Chronicles as a history of what had happened in the past when
such things had occurred. A stable and consistent Judaean family life was at
stake and Ezra used every device he could muster to get the Judaean leaders to
realize the consequences of such "unholy alliances." This is the main
reason he canonized the 22 Old Testament hooks and wrote the Book of
Chronicles. The latter book was to provide future leaders a special history of
what had occurred in the past when unconverted women entered into the
mainstream of Judaic society. It resulted in an apostasy from God and it
brought on severe and catastrophic judgments from heaven.” (ibid.)

When you begin to review some of
these books looking for this gender/women entry point, it is amazing at what
teachings we begin to discover.

“Note that the first nine chapters
of Chronicles emphasize Israelite genealogy to show how important a proper
pedigree was. While David and Solomon are both honored for their work on the
Temple and for establishing true worship at Jerusalem, Nehemiah was quick to
point out the well-known escapades of Solomon as a detriment to him (Neh.
13:26) though Solomon had enough divine wisdom to put Pharaoh's daughter away from
the holy places at Jerusalem (11 Chron. 8:11). But Solomon's rebellious son
Rehoboam was a product of "the Ammonitess" (II Chron. 12:13). He went
into early deviations and the fact that he had "many wives" is
emphasized (II Chron. 11:21-23). From that time onward, Ezra records in
Chronicles (for his Judaean leaders) an account of the "good" and
"bad" kings of Judah, and in almost every case the "good"
kings had proper Judaean mothers and the "bad" kings either had
heathen or reprobate mothers. And it was this very thing that Ezra was scolding
the Judaean leaders of his time for doing. Ezra wanted to put a stop to it, and
he did!” (ibid.)

We don’t only find this emphasis in
the books of Chronicles, Ezra/Nehemiah and Malachi. Note the following:

Now look at the Third (or Writings')
Division of the Old Testament once more. It was Ezra who put the books together
and he had a reason for doing it in the manner he did. These books were
selected to show leaders, among other things, that godly women were proper to
marry and evil women were to be shunned. In one way or another, the eleven
books of the Third Division are designed to show this.

·For
example, the Book of Psalms introduces the Division and the psalm that
highlights David's life is Psalm 51 showing his sin with Bathsheha who may have
been a Hittite woman (recall that Bathsheha was formerly the wife of Uriah the Hittite
II Sam. 11:3; 12:9). Bathsheba was the mother of Solomon (who was no paragon of
righteousness) and Solomon was under her influence (I Kings 1:11 to 2:21).

·The
next book is Proverbs. Note how the first nine chapters stress "Wisdom"
(personified as a woman) with a contrary emphasis on the evil woman who leads
the godly man astray. The last chapter, though, shows the type of woman a man
ought to have and Ezra described her with a beautiful acrostic of twenty-two
verses. Ezra thought this was a proper wife for a man!

·The
next book is Job. His story is one of faithfulness in trial in spite of a very
faithless wife (Job 2:9). Job's tenacity, however, brought him double
possessions and his three beautiful daughters became equal in prestige and
honor as sons (Job 42:13-15). The reference is to show the value of having
properly trained women and the benefit that can be derived from them for their
husbands, families and the overall society.

The next five books were called (in
Hebrew) the Megilloth (Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes,
Esther) and they emphasize in one way or another, the influence of women in
society.

·“The
first book was the Song of Songs. It is a book from a woman about Solomon.
Though Solomon had 1,000 wives and concubines, this woman is the one he should
have had (who totally loved Solomon), but he shunned her because "Solomon
must have a thousand" (Song 8:12) rather than the one who truly loved him.
Only at the end of his life did Solomon turn his attention to this one woman (8:10),
but he still never wanted to give up the other thousand. The title "Megilloth"
is itself feminine and the theme of each book stresses the feminine aspect for
godliness. The Song of Songs shows a beautiful woman who loved Solomon but he
wanted his other women and died a miserable death given to drink (Prov.31:1-9;
Eccl.12:1-7). He did not have a proper woman in his life. Ezra placed the Song
of Songs in first order among the Megilloth books in order to teach the
Judaean men of his time the need to have devoted wives who loved the true God
of Israel.

·The
next book was Ruth. The Book of Ruth shows an example of the ideal woman and
how a man can be blessed with such a truly converted woman. Ruth herself was a
Gentile woman (so there was nothing wrong in marrying a Gentile woman) but Ruth
was totally converted to the God of Abraham (Ruth 1:16,17) and this made her
very different from the unconverted women the Judaean leaders of Ezra's time
were marrying. But a woman of the LORD was precious indeed!

·The
next book is Lamentations. It is about Jerusalem personified as a royal
princess gone wrong and because of her evils she was living as an adulteress
widow (Lam. 1:1). This book shows "holy Jerusalem" as a "fallen
woman. She had deserted God to please the heathen.

·In
the Book of Ecclesiastes Solomon is reported to have said that the real joy for
men is to have a good job and a fine wife (Eccl. 9:9), but that the 1,000 women
Solomon had were more bitter than death to him (Eccl. 7:26-29). Again Ezra is
pointing out the folly of Solomon's desire for improper women and he wants the
Judaean men of his time (and for all time to come) to realize the consequences
of what evil women can do to society. Ezra was admonishing the men to
reestablish the role of their proper wives and let them rear up (with the help
of the men) godly and devoted children. This experience of Solomon was placed
in the Bible primarily to show what not to do. Solomon went wrong in his ways
no matter how rich and powerful he had become. Ezra ordered that the experience
of Solomon (as shown in Ecclesiastes) be read every year at the Feast of
Tabernacles so that Judaeans in the future would understand the value and the
responsibility of having a proper family life. Even the title of the book in
Hebrew is KOHELET (a feminine word which represents "the
Wisdom" of Proverbs 1:20,21 and 8:1-4 which is also in the feminine gender
in Hebrew). This "Wisdom" is the proper type of "Woman"
that all men ought to have: The righteous 'Woman" that God will give to
the godly man.

·The
Book of Esther is the final book of the Megilloth and it shows the power
of a devoted woman to save the whole nation of Judah. Esther put the LORD, her
people and even the welfare of her Gentile husband before that of herself. She
was a proper woman indeed!

·After
the five Megilloth (feminine) books of the Third Division comes Daniel.
He was the wisest man of the age, of royal stock (who put Jerusalem first) and
one who had an excellent and righteous upbringing (Dan.l: 3,4).

·And
finally, the books of Ezra/Nehemiah and Chronicles (which end the Third
Division) have as central themes the need for the leaders at Jerusalem to have
nothing to do with foreign or unconverted women (who produce "heathen and
impure" children), but to cherish and hold the proper Judaean women who
would rear to adulthood holy offspring to God.” (ibid.)

Here you can see how the Hebrew
Bible came together, particularly the Third Division and what the goal of the
whole Third Division in particular was.

“In effect, the Third Division was
devised by Ezra, among other things, to establish and to secure a society which
had leaders and laity devoted to the LORD (Hebrew: יהוה). This would then insure that all the people would have the right
examples to follow in their own endeavors to be holy in the sight of God.
Indeed, the establishment of the Old Testament canon itself (as well as the
arrangement of the Third Division) was prompted because of this pressing need
which Ezra and Nehemiah reckoned as so essential for proper devotion to God.”
(ibid.)

Women clearly had a major role in
inspiring all of this.

An Important Point

It is important to note at this
stage in the discussion how important this Jerusalem-centered perspective
really is. What we in the Western world have to realize is that the Bible that
we have today in our midst is not a Jerusalem-oriented
production. What has happened is that the Bible has followed a design which is
Greco-Roman in orientation rather than Hebraic. This has had devastating
consequences in understanding the true messages of that book.

This article just points out one
aspect that is missed if we have the Bible in the current Greco-Roman style.
With this reconstruction a whole different orientation presents itself to us if
we are just willing to look at the information that God is providing us at the
time He provides it.

“When one realizes the historical
factors which caused Ezra to devise the Old Testament canon, then it is
possible to understand some definite reasons for the design of the Tripartite
Divisions which Christ called "the Scriptures," (Luke 24:44,45) the
books were arranged in the various divisions to teach all facets of Old
Testament life in a proper and harmonious fashion. The positioning of the books
by Ezra made little sense to later Greeks or Romans who failed to understand
what a true Judaean society was supposed to be. They failed to grasp such
things. This is one of the main reasons that later Gentile Christians in Egypt
could not begin to appreciate the Jerusalem centered arrangement of the Old
Testament books. It simply did not make sense to them! This is certainly the
case because the codexing of the Greek Old Testament in the third or fourth
century by Egyptian Christians rearranged the books into a subjective or encyclopedic
fashion so as to "improve" the Jerusalem oriented Judaean design which
made no rhyme or reason to them.” (ibid.)

And what is one of the major
teachings that has been missed due to having the Bible in the wrong order? We
are discussing it in this article: The role of women in God’s economy and in
the design and development of His Holy Bible.

“It will mean that the essential
teachings about having a proper and loving family life between a man and woman
(with secure and stable children) was the central historical reason for the
canonization of the Old Testament. It is because mankind has so disturbed the
biblical books that we moderns fail to see this exalted position which women
have been given by God to promote a harmonious society in this world. When both
men and women understand the respective roles that each sex has been given by
God (and the biblical principles are put into action) then a congenial
relationship would have the best chance for existence. A oneness of superiority
for each sex could be the result.” (ibid.)

This is desperately needed because
God’s message to all of His children is that He loves and cares about all of
them equally and that no one complements anyone else and there are no second
born children in His family nor are there any second class citizens in God’s
Kingdom. Seeing the Bible in its original inspired order helps to bring out
these facts in a much clearer way.

To conclude, in the last years of
his life, my father devoted himself to seeing this Bible see light for the first
time in our modern age. Out of his work, a project was developed titled: The
Original Bible Project. To find out more about this high quality, academically
oriented project to restore the Holy Bible to its original inspired order and
design, please see: www.originalbible.com.

Follow by Email

Followers

About Me

Samuel Martin was born in England and is the youngest child of Dr. Ernest L. and Helen R. Martin, who are both Americans. He lived in the UK for the first 7 years of his life before moving to the USA with his family at age 7. He lived in the USA until 2001 when he married a native Israeli and relocated to live in Jerusalem. He and his wife, Sonia, have 2 daughters.
His experience with biblical scholarship began at an early age. His father initiated a program in conjunction with Hebrew Univ. and Prof. Benjamin Mazar, where over a 5 year period, some 450 college students came to work on an archaeological excavation in Jerusalem starting in 1969. Since that first trip, Samuel has visited Israel on 14 different occasions living more than 5 years of his life in the country. He has toured all areas of Israel as well as worked in several archaeological excavations.
Today, he has begun his academic career publishing 2 books dealing with biblical issues.
I write regularly on biblical subjects with a particular interest in children, families, nature, science and the Bible,and gender in the Biblical context.